Wekan MCP Server

createCard

Add a new card to a specified list on a Wekan board. Provide the board, list, title, and optionally description, due date, members, and labels.

Instructions

Create a card

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "boardId": "<boardId>",
      "listId": "<listId>",
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "createCard"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`boardId`	Yes
`listId`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`description`	No
`swimlaneId`	No
`due`	No
`members`	No
`labels`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 7, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, or permissions. This is a critical gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

While very short, the description is under-specifying rather than concise. It fails to provide necessary information, making it inefficient for the agent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 8 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It does not help the agent understand tool usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning to any parameter. The agent is left guessing about fields like 'swimlaneId' or 'members'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Create a card' clearly states the action and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like moveCard or commentCard. It is adequate but not distinguishing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The description lacks usage context entirely.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server